124 new homes for Clonsilla

The Diabolical Monocle

They'd be as well off turning in into a parking area. Loads of folks going for the train park there.
Cars parked up both sides of that road cramming the road into a kind of dangerous 1/2 of one side and 1/2 of the other side, middle lane.

Larbre34

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

They'd be as well off turning in into a parking area. Loads of folks going for the train park there.
Cars parked up both sides of that road cramming the road into a kind of dangerous 1/2 of one side and 1/2 of the other side, middle lane.

Sale price of 166 Units, lets say €41,000,000. Cost of investment and construction, lets be generous and say €25,000,000. Profit, before taxes, €16,000,000

It would take at least 150 years to generate that kind of money from parking, charged at the same rate as at the Station. At a guess Id say they'll stick with building the gaffs......

oblivious

murphaph wrote: »

No you're wrong because according to the received wisdom on this thread nobody wants to live in any of those higher density developments. They're all empty. Any cars or people you see outside are hallucinations!

Want to, does not equate to have to

dodzy

beauf wrote: »

....and its quicker to cycle the 14k into town than get the train...

I'll wager any money that you're wrong

TheBandicoot

murphaph wrote: »

That's less than 2 minutes walk to the station isn't it? It's a waste of development land to put semis in there so close to rail transport. Should have only been given permission for higher density than that really.

Kind of torn on this point. I feel like agreeing with you. But as someone who is in their mid twenties and lives with their parents in the area- if I was going to rent/buy an apartment, I would do it closer to where I work(the city centre). Surely the whole advantage of being an hour commute away from the action of the CC is that you don't have to live in a small apartment?

murphaph

oblivious wrote: »

Want to, does not equate to have to

And the people who have to live in 3 bed semis want to live in 5 bed detached houses. what's your point? Apartments are attractive for some people: no structural maintenance, no garden to maintain, no chimney to sweep or get swept. Houses are attractive for others: garden to garden in, space to tinker with your car on the drive etc. Horses for courses.

murphaph

TheBandicoot wrote: »

Kind of torn on this point. I feel like agreeing with you. But as someone who is in their mid twenties and lives with their parents in the area- if I was going to rent/buy an apartment, I would do it closer to where I work(the city centre). Surely the whole advantage of being an hour commute away from the action of the CC is that you don't have to live in a small apartment?

Apartments don't have to be small. Planning permissions can have conditions attached such as minimum qty of 3 bed apartments and minimum m² of each type of unit.

In fairness Clonsilla station to Connolly is not an hour's commute and the plan is to convert the line to DART (faster acceleration and braking than the current diesel units) and eliminate all level crossings, delivering a faster route than at present.

And once again I must point out that there's potential development land set back from the railway that can be used for lower density housing. I'm only suggesting that a 1km strip either side of mass transit corridors be reserved for higher densities. It's a waste of taxpayers' money to upgrade the likes of the Maynooth line if we can't then sweat the assets when the upgrades are complete. Mass transit needs population density to support it.

beauf

murphaph wrote: »

...Mass transit needs population density to support it.

I've been commuting using that line on and off for about 20yrs. At peak I'd say I've to stand 90% of that time. How much density do you want?

dodzy wrote: »

I'll wager any money that you're wrong

Thats because you're not thinking of it door to door, waiting for the train, or where the start and end point is. Or that delay while the train waits to get a slot to crawl into Connolly.

beauf

murphaph wrote: »

...In fairness Clonsilla station to Connolly is not an hour's commute ..

People don't live at clonsilla station, or work at connolly. So you have to add door to door time, or if they have to make another connection, bus or dart etc. Also time to wait for the connection, or the train in the first place.

murphaph wrote: »

.
the plan is to convert the line to DART (faster acceleration and braking than the current diesel units) and eliminate all level crossings, delivering a faster route than at present. ...

Can't wait.

murphaph

beauf wrote: »

I've been commuting using that line on and off for about 20yrs. At peak I'd say I've to stand 90% of that time. How much density do you want?

I stand more or less every morning on my Berlin train and there's one every 3~5 minutes and they are all 8 car trains. That's mass transit. The Maynooth line is barely breaking a sweat with trains every 20 minutes at peak. Rather a train every 5 minutes (turn up and go service-no looking at timetables) than every 20 but the Maynooth line needs more densification to support trains at 3~5 minute intervals.

horse7

any sign of a new aldi on the clonsilla rd?

beauf

murphaph wrote: »

I stand more or less every morning on my Berlin train and there's one every 3~5 minutes and they are all 8 car trains. That's mass transit. The Maynooth line is barely breaking a sweat with trains every 20 minutes at peak. Rather a train every 5 minutes (turn up and go service-no looking at timetables) than every 20 but the Maynooth line needs more densification to support trains at 3~5 minute intervals.

Missing a train when the next one is 3 mins is a lot different to when the next one is 20 mins, then when you get into Connolly the dart is also full and the next one is 10 ~15 mins away. Then you realise you've been standing for an hour.

Personally I gave it up for cycling when I can. Much more pleasant. Or get the docklands train and a dublin bike.

murphaph

beauf wrote: »

Missing a train when the next one is 3 mins is a lot different to when the next one is 20 mins, then when you get into Connolly the dart is also full and the next one is 10 ~15 mins away. Then you realise you've been standing for an hour.

Personally I gave it up for cycling when I can. Much more pleasant. Or get the docklands train and a dublin bike.

It's all related. Land use and planning, transport and infrastructure....or at least it should be related. Trains every 3 minutes would have actually been possible on the Maynooth Line if there had been proper land use forced on the developers of the 1km strip either side of that line over the last 30 years, or at least since suburban services were started under the Reynolds government in (IIRC) 1990.

If that strip had been maintained for medium/high density developments (but not small apartments!), then the critical mass would have been achieved long ago.

I am not naive. I understand the systems are broken in Ireland with only limited relationship between land use and transport infrastructure but that MUST stop and we must not (or should not) allow any more "golden land" be used for low density development that will mean we NEVER have trains running at 3 min intervals.

SDCC have realised their error and now land along the Kildare Route is either built at higher density like Adamstown or reserved for higher density like at Clonburris. It's not about making anyone live in an apartment....houses could and should still be built, but just not on the golden land adjacent to railway lines (which are extremely expensive and disruptive to retrofit but once in place can be upgraded to more and more frequent services).

Finglas Incubus

FCC planning dept have requested further information from the developers on a number of points, see below. I was interested to note directive 3, its a new one on me.

It is noted that Unit 112 which is a four bedroom unit does not meet the minimum standards for private open space as set out in Objective OS38 of the Fingal Development Plan 2011-2017. You are advised to amend the private open space accordingly.

It is considered that the proposed bin stores to serve the terraced units should be finished in brick to match the dwellings to which they are to serve. You are advised to submit revised drawings indicating this.

Objective UD11 of the Fingal Development Plan states the following: ‘Require new residential developments in excess of 100 units and large commercial/retail developments in excess of 2000 sq m to provide for a piece of public art to be agreed with the Council.’ You are requested to submit proposals for a piece of public art within the site.

A revised layout should be provided incorporating the parking allocated to each unit within the curtilage of each unit. a) Details of entry treatments, which should include tighter kerb radii and raised pedestrian crossings, should be shown. b) A revised layout for the parking and set-down facilities for the proposed crèche should be provided. The number of staff parking spaces should not exceed seven. The number of set-down spaces should be increased and the layout should avoid the necessity for any reverse manoeuvres in the vicinity of the child set-down areas. c) The attenuation areas located under any road, footpath or parking spaces in areas that are to be taken in charge by the Council should be removed or relocated to an open space area. The applicant should be advised to contact the Transportation Planning Section prior to the submission of any additional information in relation to Item No. 4.

Edit: Link to proposed site layout

Larbre34

Oh lord, I thought that 'percent for art' requirement went out with the ark. It used to be a requirement of major public infrastructure, hence all the rubbish you see strewn along the motorway network. Obviously Fingal have their own local rule about it applying to mass developments. Just more cr@p to vandalise. Why not just apply the culture/amenity levy to the permission and get some more resources for the local parks and leisure centres....

samasimo

This land was not built till now .. anyone knows anything about it?

Larbre34

The permission received in 2014 has a shelf life of 5 years, and I notice workmen are beginning to set up a site operation on the land, securing overhead network etc, so I presume they are finally building what they were granted for. About time too.

samasimo

Thank you for answering How long would you think they will take to start building and advertise new homes? any idea?

Larbre34

No problem. It seems to be a fairly standard approach that they create a website with rendered images of the house types for people to register interest, then build a small number of each type as showhomes, then advertise viewings of those and sales.

The land will require a lot of services works before any house building occurs, so probably 4-6 months before the show homes are ready and then completion in phases over 1-2 years. The best advice is watch out for the large hoarding advert to appear on the site and sign up.

December2012

Anybody know who the developer is?

goofy141

Would love any information on this as well, I think the developer is lynam ltd but cant find any contact details.

Finglas Incubus

goofy141 wrote: »

Would love any information on this as well, I think the developer is lynam ltd but cant find any contact details.

Lynams are certainly the landowners and main 'developer' (or La Vista Ltd & E.P. Lynam Properties Ltd to give them their full name) but have likely subbed it out to another. FCC planning details:

http://planning.fingalcoco.ie/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=FW14A/0042&theTabNo=1

Its been 12 years since permission was originally sought (its gone through numerous iterations) - which is borne out by the height of the trees that up until recently colonised the site!

samasimo

I see that they started already to build on this land. They already did 3 semidetached houses and they are building the 4th one. They are going really fast, but so far they didn't announced which company is selling them or how to view the offering. No board on the building location and nothing advertised anywhere!!!

robbie000

samasimo wrote: »

I see that they started already to build on this land. They already did 3 semidetached houses and they are building the 4th one. They are going really fast, but so far they didn't announced which company is selling them or how to view the offering. No board on the building location and nothing advertised anywhere!!!

They are going to be called Castlefield Court Clonsilla Dublin 15 and are with DNG. I found it on there website but no more information about it.

5T3PH3N

They're going up quick because they're timber frame houses.

ozmo

samasimo wrote: »

... No board on the building location and nothing advertised anywhere!!!

Possibly more social housing so - like the houses beside the petrol station - they were never advertised.

Finglas Incubus

Same development perhaps?

https://www.daft.ie/dublin/houses-for-sale/clonsilla/house-type-a-castlefield-hall-clonsilla-dublin-1727477/

5T3PH3N

Yup, the signs went up today.

samasimo

I am very interested to know how much these houses will cost!!

Pat Dunne

Finglas Incubus wrote: »

Same development perhaps?

https://www.daft.ie/dublin/houses-for-sale/clonsilla/house-type-a-castlefield-hall-clonsilla-dublin-1727477/

That's the very one!